Retelling the message of ‘toxic masculinity’ - a reflective journey
Introduction
During the last few years, I have had an increasing unease as to how the term ‘toxic masculinity’ is being used, shared, and communicated across many sections of society. As an educational psychologist, who works with children, families, and schools, I have had a particular interest in how this may be being communicated and understood by boys and those who teach them.
This was highlighted by Dr Peter D’Lima and Dr Claire McGuiggan of Not the Easy Way Psychology Service), both of whom are educational psychologists. They are piloting a piece of research based on their development of The Magnificent Boys Project. An ‘under tone’ in their initial discussions, was that some boys believed the narrative: ‘Boys are defective girls’ and ‘Why can’t boys just be like girls?’
This has led me, during the last twelve months, to do the following:
With the support of Dr. John Barry, undertake a small-scale scoping exercise to establish what might be being communicated within some education settings as regards ‘masculinity’.
Generate opportunities where I could present to psychology and education colleagues, an alternative narrative to the unhelpful term ‘toxic masculinity’.
On these occasions, I was able to tell people with confidence that what I was communicating was based on the research, findings, conversations and lived experiences of many individuals - predominately male and female psychology colleagues from across many psychology disciplines.
I unapologetically encouraged colleagues ‘to pick up the male lens, even for a short while, and listen to and notice what some men and boys can experience. I asked them to consider key questions as regards the narrative around men and boys, what discourses dominate currently in society and in the media, which ones are privileged, and which ones might have been subjugated. My hope was that for my male and female colleagues in psychology and education, these sessions would allow them to think about: what stories are untold, unheard, and unknown and which stories are visible, invisible, voiced, and unvoiced (see PSDP—Resources and Tools: Social GGRRAAACCEEESSS and the LUUUTT model).
Content
The ‘small scale study / scoping exercise’ consisted of accessing and reading a range of primary and secondary school lesson plans, resources, and programmes of study – these were from the Relationships and Sex Education (RSE) strand of the Personal, Social and Health Education (PSHE) curriculum. It also involved interviews with three teachers (two primary and one secondary), as regards their experience of PSHE content related to masculinity, men, and boys.
This led to three opportunities for presentations to various groups of psychologists across the country. The scoping exercise was one element of a much wider discussion in these presentations. The hope was that the involvement of education colleagues in the scoping exercise and the attendees at the presentations, would ultimately benefit children, young people, and their families. This would be done, even in a small part by: raising some awareness, shifting some perceptions and attitudes, developing some knowledge and skills, changing what some people do and changing some practice across organisations.
As well as the findings of this exercise, I was able to present an overview of the current national context, as regards some of the key issues affecting men and boys. I was able to explore with the attendees the implicit bias in language and communication that can impact the understanding and support of men and boys – being mindful that ‘Language updates rapidly through use and misuse’ (Tobin, 2023).
Topics discussed also included men as victims of Intimate Partner Violence (IPV), fathers in the family courts and the prevalence of men in prison; this enabled me to make reference to an apparent lack of a framework for female aggression (Graham-Kevan, 2022).
There was also an opportunity to consider the possible impact of an under-representation of men in the workforce, across all stages of learning from nursery through to tertiary education. Mention was also made of the concerns raised by some colleagues about a possible ‘feminisation’ of culture both in the training and practical applications of psychology, sociology, and health care.
Educational Psychology colleagues were particularly interested in hearing about the gaps in boys’ achievement across all stages of education. Reference has been made by Mary Curnock Cook CBE (2023) and Nick Fletcher MP that this has remained the same for over a decade and that it gets very limited policy attention across government departments. Mary Curnock Cook has suggested that it is discriminatory and needs ‘calling out’. There is a significant lack of research into these gaps, even with the persistence of data. This data across developed economies, seems to be ignored, possibly because it doesn’t fit the current ‘privileged male narratives’ that are being espoused by many sources. Both Mary and Nick recognise this really matters because these gaps in attainment contribute to the growing underclass of young men within the UK and across many developed economies.
“After one of the events, two male psychologists, separate to each other, expressed their appreciation, and said how ‘brave’ I was. It was humbling to be valued in this way. However, it was also sad that we appear now to be in a culture where if an individual puts the spotlight on men and boys, then they are considered ‘brave’.”
Results / responses
General findings from RSE documents, statutory guidance, and resources
• There is evidence of a desire to communicate some balance within the text and for the most part, there is an emphasis on keeping the language ‘gender neutral’.
• It is interesting to note that ‘masculinity’ and ‘femininity’ are not terms that are used in the PSHE programmes of study
• In some of the resources and the documents there seemed to be a minimisation of men and boys being victim and women being perpetrators.
• Misogyny was referred to in the documentation but there was no reference to misandry
• There was also ‘a bias’ within some resources and links offered to schools, to focus on the careers of girls and women and not of boys.
Statutory guidance for governing bodies from the Dept of Education
• There was clear reference that men and boys can also be victims of abuse, sexual harassment and sexual assault, although it was emphasised that it was not so prevalent, compared to women and girls
• It was interesting to note that there is no suggestion ‘in a gender specific manner’, that women and girls have the capacity to cause harm towards men and boys and also to each other.
General findings from the interviews
• All the staff were engaged, genuinely interested, and wanted to make sure they were fair and ‘getting it right’ as regards these topics related to men and boys. The key factor for them is that children ‘feel secure in themselves - to know they have value and a voice’. They were keen that all the children see themselves as ‘equal’ and that as human beings, we all have rights and are as valuable as each other.
• It was recognised by the staff that the 1 x hour per fortnight is not enough to cover all the areas of PSHE. They try hard to weave more than this in across the curriculum. They were also keen to highlight that RSE is only one strand of the PSHE curriculum.
• School staff try and not be reactive to issues that might arise in the media and community. They try to be ‘measured’, wait and ‘take in’ all the information. They will then try and ‘connect the issue’ with the ethos of the school in a more natural way.
• A general perception amongst the primary school teachers was that the impact of ‘toxic masculinity’ was more of an issue in secondary schools.
• No staff member had heard of the term misandry.
“Some [Female colleagues) were particularly challenged by how negatively biased some of the language and data can be in the way it is presented about men and boys. A few alluded to feeling ‘uncomfortable’ that they had not noticed it. There seemed to be general surprise in the audience when I provide examples of the general lack of funding for men and boys charities and funding for men and boys research. They were not aware that there can be a barrier to ‘look at men in their own right’.”
General feedback from the presentations
On each of the three occasions, the sessions seemed to be well received and generated further conversations. People were polite, curious, and respectful. After one of the events, two male psychologists, separate to each other, expressed their appreciation, and said how ‘brave’ I was. It was humbling to be valued in this way. However, it was also sad that we appear now to be in a culture where if an individual puts the spotlight on men and boys, then they are considered ‘brave’.
There was much affirmation from many female colleagues as well as honesty from some of them as regards the range of emotions they had felt. Many who attended the session were shocked by facts they had not been aware of before and were particularly challenged by how negatively biased some of the language and data can be in the way it is presented about men and boys. A few alluded to feeling uncomfortable that they had not noticed it.
There seemed to be general surprise in the audience when I provide examples of the general lack of funding for men and boys charities and funding for men and boys research. They were not aware that there can be a barrier to ‘look at men in their own right’ and not just who they are in relation to women.
Many had assumed that the session would focus on how ‘toxic’, masculinity had become and what we were going to do about it. However, they were pleased to discover that this presentation was approaching ‘masculinity’ from a different angle, challenging the status quo and current use of language, and offering a wider and strengths-based perspective.
There was some discomfort and ill ease from a few of the female colleagues who struggled with the focus solely being on men and boys - with no reference to women’s rights. I emphasised again that this one-hour presentation was not ‘sweeping away’ the many years that women have had to fight for equality.
Next steps
It was an encouragement to share positive practice and some ‘next steps’ that all can be involved with. I referred to ‘The speak charter - ‘stand up, speak up and speak wisely’. These are ten simple points to encourage healthy conversations that are not polarised and automatically binary in nature. It is taken from the Magnificent Boys Project pilot which was referred to at the beginning of this article. This project aims to provide a space for boys and young men to reflect on their own views and experiences, building high aspirations for them to become the best version of themselves. The hope is that it will inspire positive views of masculinity and the contribution they can make as boys and men to family and society.
This linked in well with ‘positive masculinity’ as portrayed by Gender Parity UK - looking at the four ‘roles’ based alongside characteristics: leadership and vision (King), action and fortitude (Warrior), wisdom and knowledge (Sage), compassion and empathy (Lover). Perhaps work from Heidi Tranter (2023), could also be woven into future workshops and sessions, promoting the best of masculinity. Her initial findings of what motivates men to join and remain in the armed forces are: ‘love and belonging’, ‘responsibility’, ‘survival’, ‘freedom’, ‘fun’.
I believe if each of us were to promote even just one strand of the Gender Parity UK’s MANifesto, there could be a positive shift in society today. Examples of the statements are:
• Recognising that empowered, capable men who bring vision, action, wisdom, and empathy to their families create a lasting legacy not just within their homes but within society as a whole.
• Recognising that men are women’s best allies and women are men’s best allies.
• Seeking out partnerships with women’s groups who share our vision, recognising the benefit this has for women, children, and society.
• Presenting information and advocacy in an honest and transparent fashion that is based on facts, evidence, and expertise rather than ideology, conjecture, and hysteria.
• Standing unapologetically for the special contribution men give to society, and working collectively to publicise this fact. Then equipping men with the tools, resources and encouragement to make their own special contribution.
I encouraged my educational psychology colleagues to continue to do what they do well at – respectively challenge, question, be curious, call out, suggest, and promote alternatives, particularly when: sweeping negative statements are made about boys and men, ideology is presented as fact, and when a male lens is completely absent from policy and practice.
I encouraged teachers and educational psychologists to ask the Department for Education (DfE), when exploring aspects related to men and boys to source advice from ‘further afield’, from organisations such as The Centre for Male Psychology who are clear that denigrating masculinity is linked to poor mental health.
A secondary school headteacher, made the comment to me, ‘there are not enough good male role models for boys today’ – something that is frequently heard across the airwaves. I responded by saying, there are many great male role models within local communities, extended families and across all sectors of society, but often the fact they are ‘men’ is often not highlighted.
I wonder if with the changes in society and within some families, we are now at a point where, we have to intentionally spotlight ‘men’ in this way – remind people of the many good men that serve, create, build, achieve, care and succeed against the odds. Similarly in the way what historically has, for various reasons, been highlighted for women e.g. the BBC’s 100 Women. So following that approach, and in the spirit of equity, lets start with 100 Men. The BBC also revealing its list of 100 inspiring and influential men from around the world for 2023.
Personal reflection
Through this retelling of the ‘toxic masculinity’ story, I have carried a sense of responsibility, and apprehension, along with courage and an overriding need for increased clarity and fairness.
At the outset of the interviews and the presentations, I set the context of the ‘men and boys’ topic in a recognition of the ongoing violence and discrimination that exists against some women. I felt obliged to clearly name that the topics raised here, do not diminish in any way the focus that still needs to be on ensuring the well-being and safety of girls and women.
Nevertheless, I felt frustrated and disappointed that I needed to overtly mention this and to justify why the focus was not on ‘women and girls’. I look forward to the day, when any ‘sense of threat’ of a male psychologist focussing on ‘men and boys’ has completely gone and a realisation that an individual can be passionate about the rights of men and boys and continue to respect, admire, love and care for the many amazing women in their lives.
It’s a long winding road ahead and I am on it - I don’t intend to get off it any time soon. I look forward to welcoming psychology and education colleagues, men and women, who will be my companions on this journey towards the growing of an equitable, healthy, and flourishing society for us all.
Scroll down to join the discussion
Disclaimer: This article is for information purposes only and is not a substitute for therapy, legal advice, or other professional opinion. Never disregard such advice because of this article or anything else you have read from the Centre for Male Psychology. The views expressed here do not necessarily reflect those of, or are endorsed by, The Centre for Male Psychology, and we cannot be held responsible for these views. Read our full disclaimer here.
Like our articles?
Click here to subscribe to our FREE newsletter and be first
to hear about news, events, and publications.
Have you got something to say?
Check out our submissions page to find out how to write for us.
.
